Technologies, methods and techniques of organizing educational process of modern teaching

Conclusion
We have seen many examples for the use of technology in the classroom and its benefits in today's society. A review of the nations report card (Philips, 2001; Science 2000 major results, 2001) indicate that science scores for grade 12 students were higher when:
There was weekly involvement in scientific activities by the teachers,
Computers were used to collect and analyze data,
Students had access to the internet at home,
The mode of instruction was inquiry based.
When teachers used computers for simulations and models or for data analysis, the students scored 5-6 points higher than those that had no computer access. This is in line with the trend towards conceptual understanding and scientific investigation. In science, students can use the computers to search for data (values of scientific constants, etc.), plot graphs of laboratory results and analyze data. Average scaled scores also improved when teachers had science demonstrations, or used multi-media or laser discs on science topics. However, the important fact is that it needs to be used appropriately for it to be effective.
The report showed that moderate use (once or twice a week) proved most beneficial. In classes where students had a daily dose of technology, scores were lower. A recommendation is that technology should be used to enhance the education by engaging students into higher order thinking skills and not as a substitute for teaching. The report also showed scores for minorities such as African Americans, American Indians and Hispanics to be much lower than average. Much of this is due to the lower socioeconomic status of these minority groups. Over the next few decades, this percentage will rise to about 40%. It is important that action be taken now to prevent them for slipping further and further behind.
The list of Literature:
1. Adair-Hauck, B., & Donato, R. (1994). Foreign language explanations within the zone of proximal development. The Canadian Modern Language Review 50(3), 532-557.
2. Anderson, A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Armstrong, D. F., Stokoe, W. C., & Wilcox, S. E. (1995). Gesture and the nature of language. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.
4. Arndt, H., & Janney, R. W. (1987). InterGrammar: Toward an integrative model of verbal, prosodic and kinesic choices in speech. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
5. Asher, J. J. (1981). Comprehension training: The evidence from laboratory and classroom studies. In H. Winitz (Ed.), The Comprehension Approach to Foreign Language Instruction (pp. 187-222). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
6. Bacon, S. M. (1992a). Authentic listening in Spanish: How learners adjust their strategies to the difficulty of input. Hispania 75, 29-43.
7. Bacon, S. M. (1992b). The relationship between gender, comprehension, processing strategies, cognitive and affective response in foreign language listening. Modern Language Journal 76(2), 160-178.
8. Batley, E. M., & Freudenstein, R. (Eds.). (1991). CALL for the Nineties: Computer Technology in Language Learning. Marburg, Germany: FIPLV/EUROCENTRES.
9. Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.